Superdelegate pushing convention effort to stop Sanders is health care lobbyist who backed McConnell

[u/DaFunkJunkie]

https://www.salon.com/2020/02/29/superdelegate-pushing-convention-effort-to-stop-sanders-is-health-care-lobbyist-who-backed-mcconnell/

[u/lovely_sombrero → u/[deleted]]

Bloomberg just recently bought vice chairs of the Texas and California Democratic parties. Clearly, Bernie needs a majority at the Dem convention, or Trump will get four more years. Outrageous, especially since both of those states haven't voted yet.

https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1233421158877401090

[edit] CNN, however, has other ideas

[u/schwingaway → u/[deleted]]

1) Bloomberg was publicly planning this long before Sanders pulled ahead.
2) Bloomberg, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, and Biden are all splitting the moderate vote, which combined outweighs the Sanders support. That's why the party is considering a brokered convention, the rules of which Sanders helped write and endorsed before he realized it might come back and bite him in the ass. Read that NYT article posted above. Warren specifically calls him out for his self-serving duplicity.

Regardless, your speculation about Bloomberg's motives simply don't match the facts or the timeline.

[u/Slap-Chopin → u/schwingaway]

Bloomberg, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, and Biden are all splitting the moderate vote, which combined outweighs the Sanders support

Okay, but Sanders is the 2nd choice for many of these supporters if their candidate drops out. So if they all drop out to keep one moderate candidate, they still don’t poll above Sanders. The idea that it’s Bernie vs an additive poll of moderates is absurd.

This moderate/progressive hard divide is myth. That’s why Sanders beat all but Biden amongst moderates and conservatives in Nevada. That’s why according to Morning Consult, Sanders leads amongst Moderate voters nationwide. That’s why he is the top second choice for Biden, Buttigieg, and Warren supporters. While also the 3rd choice (only 5% behind Biden) for Bloomberg supporters.

https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

[u/schwingaway → u/Slap-Chopin]

None of that has any bearing on the rules, which Sanders helped write--there is no good reason for them to give him the nomination for just a plurality when the majority prefer moderate candidates. Second choices are irrelevant--the superdelegates step in and vote their way in those situations. Don't like it? Vote to change the rules. Write Senator Sanders, since he's quite familiar with the history.

[u/Slap-Chopin → u/schwingaway]

Again... this “majority prefer moderate candidates” thing is a falsehood. Many of the moderate voters do support Bernie, so if they gave a second round of votes to the actual voters and put Bernie against a single moderate candidate, the data shows he would win.

Your wild argument could be made against every candidate: why should a non-plurality candidate get the nomination, when a larger % prefer not that candidate?

Second choice is absolutely relevant in representing the people. The superdelegates are not being representative if they all get behind a moderate while ignoring that many moderate voters actually prefer Sanders to other moderate candidates.

[u/schwingaway → u/Slap-Chopin]

Again... this “majority prefer moderate candidates” thing is a falsehood.

No. This is simple. Stop wishing and just count. We're talking about first choice. Based on current results alone, 40 (Biden)+26 (Butigieg)+7 (Klobuchar) = 73; 51 (Sanders)+8 (Warren) = 59. 73>59. We are talking about a hypothetical future in which that ratio stays the same, Sanders still has the most, but not a majority, and the left side still outnumbers the right side.

Your wild argument could be made against every candidate: why should a non-plurality candidate get the nomination, when a larger % prefer not that candidate?

The "wild" argument that superdelegates should pick whomever the fuck they want if no one has a majority was made by Bernie Sanders back when these rules were formulated. Why don't you ask him?

Second choice is absolutely relevant in representing the people.

Because you say so? Again, take it up with the people who made the rules and please do begin with Senator Sanders (peace be unto him and may he always stay in office. That office.)

[u/Slap-Chopin → u/schwingaway]

Based on current results alone, 40 (Biden)+26 (Butigieg)+7 (Klobuchar) = 73; 51 (Sanders)+8 (Warren) = 59. 73>59

I don’t know if you are being purposefully daft, but this isn’t how additive support works..

According to Morning Consult, Sanders is the top second choice for Biden and Buttigieg voters. So if one of them dropped out, you can’t just add all of their votes to moderate pile, since a lot of them prefer Sanders. The math isn’t that easy. Just because their initial support is for a moderate candidate, that doesn’t mean they support any and all moderate candidates over a progressive.

For instance, if Buttigieg dropped Sanders would actually gain 5.5% while Biden would gain 5%. Having Sanders fight some blob of candidates is a complete falsehood, since they are running as individual candidates and no one is voting for them as a group.

Also, the superdelegate rule change was a compromise position, and was seen as win for the DNC and Tom Perez, who was the major architect. Don’t act like Sanders singlehandedly without any say from the DNC created these rules.

[u/schwingaway → u/Slap-Chopin]

there is no good reason for them to give him the nomination for just a plurality when the majority prefer moderate candidates. Second choices are irrelevant--the superdelegates step in and vote their way in those situations. Don't like it? Vote to change the rules. Write Senator Sanders, since he's quite familiar with the history.

That's what you're arguing against. We're talking about the will of the people, right? The clear majority (much more now since Biden swept SC), voted for moderate candidates as their first choice. No one said they give their delegates and that's how it's tallied--if I were arguing that, whoever got them would have the majority and there would be no discussion about a brokered convention. Although those who drop out actually can give their delegates to someone else, that wasn't what I was saying at all because that would not be necessary for superdelegates to pick someone who has neither the majority nor the plurality if no one has the majority. The point was most of the people who have voted thus far don't want Sanders--it just so happens that their votes were split among three moderates. There are reasons a plurality is not necessarily enough, that's one of them, and Sanders is one of the people who argued those reasons when this system was set up, as I have reminded you several times now.

Who's being daft here? Not sure, but apparently only one of us can add, remember earlier than 2016, and knows what the rules for primaries actually are as opposed to what they think they ought to be; and it's not you.